Who else agrees that Civ 5 has been dumbed down?

[harveysburger]

about Civ4 -> some people might reply that the AI was only stronger at higher levels because it got bonuses (which is true, you just have to look in \Assets\XML\GameInfo\CIV4HandicapInfo.xml)

well to that I answer, SO WHAT??? The AI clearly behaved better anyway... but of course a human remains smarter... so to keep the challenge interesting they offer some difficulty levels that give bonuses to AI... SO WHAT?

 

[Fistalis]

about Civ4 -> some people might reply that the AI was only stronger at higher levels because it got bonuses (which is true, you just have to look in \Assets\XML\GameInfo\CIV4HandicapInfo.xml)

well to that I answer, SO WHAT??? The AI clearly behaved better anyway... but of course a human remains smarter... so to keep the challenge interesting they offer some difficulty levels that give bonuses to AI... SO WHAT?

The big issue is.. The AI can and did overcome its tactical stupidity with SOD. Now.. the AI has no such crutch to fall on so battles are fought purely based on tactical prowess.. of which the AI has none. I'm all for removing SOD.. problem is they didn't spend enough time invested into the tactical AI to overcome the AI losing its most useful tool. And ya i was one of those people who actually preferred to play on noble simply cause I like the idea of an even playing field. Some people have no problem trading fairness for gameplay some people do. Really not a surprise that they included this old AI improving trick.. just that it really doesnt make up for the AIs tactical stupidity.

 

[zaxxon23]

The game is clearly dumbed down, and if you can't see this you're out of touch with the civ universe. Yes, there were some mechanics that are tedious in Civ4, and it's good to see them gone in Civ5, however it appears to me that they took too much out. I simply don't like pressing the end turn button over and over, and I'd be surprised if many other people do. That's what happens when everything gets so streamlined.

That being said there are good things about this game and I have the hopes they will reintroduce features over time.

 

[Balerune]

I don't care about the sliders, but wath i mean as dumbed down is that: i win with Romans a war agaist Shongai, and the idiot make a peace treaty giving me 3 (!) cities...
I made them puppets, but my felicity gone -25. In two turns, thanks the overflowing money, i bought 3 colosseum and it went down to -8, than in three turn i come back to +1... And that was on King difficulty... I stopped a moment and seeing my points stand up on the others by far 400, i thought that this game is little idiotic...

The game lack the true difficulty in the management of the empire, i almost don't care of my cities, but only of my army.... And go on on winning.. I step my foot on the heado of Arabians likethey were children... Of foolish i was, when i bought Civ V thinking it was a strategy and management game... It is a turn based wargame with production based on resources (like in RTS) and upgrade tree... But i have better games for that like Operational Art of War III....

You're a better man than me. I still haven't completed a game as when I play I try to restrict myself to a certain style of play and so far have lost interest in actually trying to win a game. I'm not a combat type of player but even I see the AI do stupid things and the offering of cities like you mentioned above as well in trades.

 

[Evalis]

The grand irony is that the poll actually favours the idea that the game is NOT dumbed down.. how you can possibly say that 1 in 4 verifies your opinion is completely beyond me when the only 3 choices are 'undecided' 'no' and 'yes'. Clearly that would indicate the opposite if we were going from a purely number perspective.

This game has -not- been dumbed down. Civ Rev was 'dumbed down' primarily because your selection choices rarely mattered. In civ v your selection choices are MORE important than in civ iv. You simply cannot build everything. And herein lies the problem. Most civ players are completionists. They love having a massive empire with every building, unit and tech imaginable.. and because they cannot do so, they feel cheated, and wantonly throw around the notion that this makes the game less complex.

 

[Minmaster]

now we all know why the demo was held back...
i surely wouldn't have bought this game if i knew how bad it was.

 

[Balerune]

The big issue is.. The AI can and did overcome its tactical stupidity with SOD. Now.. the AI has no such crutch to fall on so battles are fought purely based on tactical prowess.. of which the AI has none. I'm all for removing SOD.. problem is they didn't spend enough time invested into the tactical AI to overcome the AI losing its most useful tool. And ya i was one of those people who actually preferred to play on noble simply cause I like the idea of an even playing field. Some people have no problem trading fairness for gameplay some people do. Really not a surprise that they included this old AI improving trick.. just that it really doesnt make up for the AIs tactical stupidity.

So all this hype about a better AI was just that -- hype?

I remember when I started the first civ4 game which took around 20 + hours to play and I could play at the higher levels but with the different mods and expansions I started to play down in levels myself( except for the ones that weren't combat based). I was expecting at least that first civ4 type of experience.

The only great thing besides the graphics is the music, but civ 4 also had some great music (eg some minimalist from Nixon in China) but the play seems worse than vanilla civ4 unless I am missing something. [but it is cute to hear the foreign languages -- haven't heard latin since the old latin masses.]

 

[Katzenkrimis]

UPDATE ON POLL (9/25):
Civ5 is too much of a "choose your own adventure" instead of what should be a "create your own destiny."

It is. It's very cheap. With an all-too-simple feel to it. There's nothing challenging about it. I can't believe how they implemented the happiness. It's so poorly done.

"Oh, look, a whale resource. Let's snatch that up for some plus-five happiness."

How old are we?

And with resources littered all over the map it's like a free-for-all. Talk about diluting your gameplay experience. A small child would enjoy this kind of stuff.

I think back to the Anno series. They did a great job of implementing the happiness feature in that game. It's much deeper. Much more challenging.

 

[Traitorfish]

One of the observations that has been made about Civ5 is that it resembles a German-style board game rather than an historical simulation, and intentionally so. Perhaps that should be kept in mind- it is rather easier, after all, to criticise a game for being a bad game than for simply failing to be the kind of game that you wanted it to be.

 

[Ayt]

It doesn't what kind of game it resembles. The AI is very poor and there are numerous balancing issues (not to mention all the bugs, the lack of proper documentation, etc.).

 

[Traitorfish]

That's not an issue of "dumbing down", though, that's and issue of execution. Most of the complaints have been aimed at conscious design choices, and with the assumption that the choices were poorly made, rather than simply being different from those that they expected.

If someone breeds a Shetland Collie, you can complain that it has poor conformation, but you can't complain that it's not a Dachshund.

 

[mrlaze]

its pretty boring IMO. I used to be able to sit and play civ(2,3,4) nearly all day. i can barely stand to play 5 for more than 30-40 minutes.

 

[Bad Brett]

It's interesting to see that more and more people vote for "dumb down"... Have the boards ran out of fanbois or are everybody who likes it still playing the game?

 

[Minmaster]

its pretty boring IMO. I used to be able to sit and play civ(2,3,4) nearly all day. i can barely stand to play 5 for more than 30-40 minutes.

this...
one more turn addiction is cured

 

[Ignorant Teacher]

It's interesting to see that more and more people vote for "dumb down"... Have the boards ran out of fanbois or are everybody who likes it still playing the game?

Or people are starting to see the same problems we saw a little earlier.

 

[KingYosef]

This just in... less than 50 percent now disagree that Civ 5 has been dumb down. That means the numbers show that possibly more than 50 percent of Civ 5 user agree that the game has been dumb down.

BTW, this is coming from a guy who bought Civ 1 with his allowance in the early 90's.

 

[KingYosef]

It is. It's very cheap. With an all-too-simple feel to it. There's nothing challenging about it. I can't believe how they implemented the happiness. It's so poorly done.

"Oh, look, a whale resource. Let's snatch that up for some plus-five happiness."

How old are we?

And with resources littered all over the map it's like a free-for-all. Talk about diluting your gameplay experience. A small child would enjoy this kind of stuff.

I think back to the Anno series. They did a great job of implementing the happiness feature in that game. It's much deeper. Much more challenging.

LOL! Genius! This post made my day.

 

[Oneluv]

This really is kind of a foolish post. IMHO

Please...This game looks way too beautiful to be dumbed down. Plus I just paid $50 for it and I resent the implication. Pea-shooters at dawn sir!

(to me) your implication is that to enjoy this game: You have to be dumb. Who's going to admit to that with any great fidelity? And while I may agree with the assertion(or may not). I would not agree the asertion is factual. I'm fairly sure smart people enjoy this game, I just suffer from imagination.

Further not everyone wants intricate complexity. Some people like their complexity simple. That can't be dumb.

And the A.I is...well..it's...hmmm. It contains lots of numbers. And lots of numbers is not dumb!

This is not scientific.

 

[Biz_]

civ5 seems like a harder game

i could roll over nearly everyone while i was half asleep in civ4

civ5 seems less formulaic

 

[KingYosef]

This really is kind of a foolish post. IMHO

Please...This game looks way too beautiful to be dumbed down. Plus I just paid $50 for it and I resent the implication. Pea-shooters at dawn sir!

(to me) your implication is that to enjoy this game: You have to be dumb. Who's going to admit to that with any great fidelity? And while I may agree with the assertion(or may not). I would not agree the asertion is factual. I'm fairly sure smart people enjoy this game, I just suffer from imagination.

Further not everyone wants intricate complexity. Some people like their complexity simple. That can't be dumb.

And the A.I is...well..it's...hmmm. It contains lots of numbers. And lots of numbers is not dumb!

This is not scientific.

Well, binary code also contains lots of numbers, but that doesn't mean it's more complex. We are talking about gaming experience here. If you have been a Civ player in the past you will obviously see that dumbing down half of us are talking about.